Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This research has explored the status of computerization in architectural firms and the problems they face in adopting and using computers. The research methodology included both, a literature search and case studies consisting of interviews and questionnaires. To gain an in-depth understanding of the status of computer use and its related problems, and to benefit from the experience of current computer owner/users, eleven Vancouver firms which currently use computers in their practice, are interviewed. The initial decision to computerize is often based on a group of perceptions from the benefits of computer use for the practice. This decision is usually rationalized by the need to remain competitive in the market, to increase the productivity or to respond to client's/project's requirements. The extent of planning for the process of computerization usually depends on the size of the practice and scope of computerization. Planning however, is typically short term and problems and needs are addressed as and when they occur. Most architects select their hardware first and then their application software. The typical approach at this stage is to rely mainly on in-house resources and to select the system mainly according to price. The issues related to implementation and use of the system are usually addressed stage by stage. In attempting successful implementation and computer use, the impact of management style and staffs attitudes appear to be significant. In most firms there is not any methods of evaluation to identify and modify the problems and therefore increase the effectiveness of computer use in the practice. System expansion is in general due to satisfactory experience, or an initial under estimate of station requirements. This stage is often based on a more realistic understanding of both, the firm's requirements and the computers capabilities. The most important observation is that the validity of the advantages of computerization are not examined at the initial stages nor are methods of increasing and achieving them. In addition, revenue increase through the expansion of services is seldom considered. Following the research, a series of guidelines are developed for practising architects, suggesting that advance planning can reduce most problems or their impacts. These guidelines present some important factors to be considered in the process of computerization were developed. They are structured according to the stages of computerization.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».